Were rules made to be broken? Academic misconduct and best practices for conducting oral exams

Chu, Angela; Sisson, Annamarie

Abstract

Internationalisation has become the trend in education, as a strategic choice in economic development, not only benefits in monetary (revenue) but also a means of higher education reputation (de Wit, 2020). Simkin and McLeod (2010, p. 442) are concerned about a rise in cheating over the years and evidentially many studies have revealed that there is a strong relationship between “cheating” in school and “unethical behaviour” at work. This cheating behaviour will have a direct impact on the AACSB (Association for the Advancement of Collegiate Schools of Business) accreditation, the university's reputation in perceiving quality educational institutions, and the public expectation to teach ethical behaviour. Simkin and McLeod (2010) found about 60% of students have cheated at least once and “motivation” is one of the reasons to cheat, including “cultural or moral acceptance of cheating as an established norm”. Interestingly, Christodoulou (2022) reported that university is the problem. It could be the intaking process of non-qualified students and students from countries that have different educational standards and false to treat them equally. The university has provided many supports for all students, including referencing guidelines, academic writing seminars, etc.

With recent concerns about artificial intelligence (AI) such as ChatGPT, a normalization of adopting support to their work can be alarming. Boubker (2024) revealed these language processing tools allow for personalized interactions in summarizing the massive information sources from the internet that leads to students’ satisfaction. However, on the other hand, the source of information may lead to a concern of accuracy (Scribbr, 2023). Therefore, there is a need for thoughtful integration AI generated information into the students’ work. That can be teaching students’ technological proficiency as (Labrague et al., 2023) suggested, including the use of AI. For instance, providing guidelines for student using AI for their work (such as DLTE 2023 guidelines). Besides, the industry is widely used in these AI. For instance, the hotel industry is using ChatGPT in response to guest’s complaints.

Despite many debates on the usage of AI, this is the norm. If these tools are managed to help students learn, and students manage to find academic readings to support their argument, they are still learning. However, the critical concern is that students are not submitting their work such as ghost-writing which is the main objective of this study. Therefore, this study aims to provide practical guidelines (best practices) in The Business School (TBS) of Edinburgh Napier University as a case study, with four objectives:

1. What are the current practices/guidelines for academic misconduct committee officers (ACO) handling students’ academic misconduct, focusing on undergraduate and postgraduate students' research proposals and/or dissertations?

2. What are the (current and potential) challenges and issues that the supervisors currently facing?

3. Providing the best practice in conducting oral examinations (viva) with students for both supervisors and the ACO teams. As well as the implication of student training on the consequence of unethical acts in their work.

4. This may lead to further suggestive guidance to the supervisor during the supervision process.

Citation

Chu, A., & Sisson, A. (2024, May). Were rules made to be broken? Academic misconduct and best practices for conducting oral exams. Presented at CHME (Council for Hospitality Management Education) 2024, Leeds

• Presentation Conference Type: Conference Paper (published)
• Conference Name: CHME (Council for Hospitality Management Education) 2024
• Start Date: May 21, 2024
• End Date: May 24, 2024
• Acceptance Date: Feb 26, 2024
• Deposit Date: May 28, 2024
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed